Another Whistleblower, Anti Corrruption & Justice Website Screams G’Day New Zealand!

Note: Important update at the bottom of this post

LF have just noted the launch of yet another website dedicated to fighting injustice in New Zealand. Funnily enough the person who advised us was none other than Matthew Blomfield; although we’re pretty sure he’ll be regretting his bad habit of jumping to conclusions; his shoot-from-the-hip style keeps seeing the poor bastard shooting himself in the foot

It appears that Blomfield has written to a number of individuals wrongly blaming them for uploading documents to a brand spanking new website, openjustice.tv

In Blomfield’s haste it has obviously not crossed his mind that the people he so often accuses were not in fact even aware of this new site; that is until he alerted them and LF to it.

LF certainly had no knowledge of the site. In fact the site appears at this stage to be private, as it fails to rank in any Google search, at least the searches we have conducted.

In his threatening correspondence Blomfield included both the email that he alleges he received from the websites administrators, apparently notifying him that documents pertaining to himself had been uploaded, and that in the interests of “open justice” they were just letting him know…..As you do.

All very strange really, if you ask us. Matthew Blomfield opines:

By Email
Open Justice, (Redacted) and others
Attention: (redacted)

Dear (redacted)

Further to my letter of 12 December 2015, As I am sure you are aware yesterday I received an email from “Open Justice” informing me that my emails are currently being uploaded to their website. Email as follows;

From: Open Justice openjustice@inbox.ru

Date: 7 March 2016 at 6:00:58 PM NZDT

To: matt@blomfield.co.nz

Subject: Open Justice Reply-To: Open Justice <openjustice@inbox.ru>

Open Justice has received and published a significant amount of material that covers some of your business communications. In the interest of Open Justice you are hereby notified of its existence http://openjustice.tv/projects/matthew-blomfield/

— Open Justice

I have hard evidence of you previously uploading information to a “Google Drive” and it is clear that you have knowledge of the attack on me.

Mr Slater and his cohorts you included will learn that for every illegal event that you organise I will take further steps to make you all responsible for your actions.

I have already briefed this matter and expect that a statement of claim that will cover your previous action and will look to uncover your involvement in this will be ready by the end of this week at which point it will be filed and served on you as the defendant.

If you are under any illusion that I am bluffing contact Mr Slater and ask him how many times I have threatened proceedings and not followed through with those threats.

If you have the means to rectify the recent illegal disclosure I suggest you move quickly as I will be.

Yours faithfully

Matthew Blomfield

All piss and wind, when it comes to Slater, the allegations made in his most recent letter are in fact incorrect to start with. As yet we haven’t seen Blomfield even start his defamation case against Slater, let alone cross the finish line and win.

No, Blomfield has been far to busy trying to get the names of the victims who blew the whistle. Victims who all lost serious spondulies, more of whom have fallen out of the woodwork since Slater first published his posts in 2012.

Mr Blomfield has clearly made many enemies in New Zealand business circles. Quite why it is that he is blaming these individuals is unknown to us, but perhaps it may have been worth his while investigating both the website and its content before firing off yet another threatening email.

The first point we would like to make is that neither team LF nor any of its sources have had anything whatsoever to do with the new boy on the block “www.openjustice(dot)tv”. Whilst we welcome any new addition in the area of justice this particular site may be cause for concern.

Whats-more, whilst investigating this website we found a few irregularities one should consider before visiting. The first, as aforesaid, the sites failure to show-up in Google searches. This normally means that the site’s settings are set to private.

The second is the websites choice of domain suffix “.tv”. Although, in the websites information pages the site owners do explain this by claiming:

.TV? WHY?

Using a .nz service, any New Zealand service, would place Open Justice within the reaches of Crown Law as well as risk being exposed to legal take-down orders. .tv names are robust to International take-down requests

This claim is not necessarily correct in our view however and so throws a possible shadow over the true reasons behind the use of the .tv suffix which is normally used for audiovisual sites.

As one authoritative website. torrentfreak, notes;

1: Avoid registering domains that are handled by VeriSign or Afilias.

VeriSign operates .com, .net, .cc, .name and .tv while Afilias operates .info, .org, .mobi, .in, .me, .aero and more.

If certain SEO or brand related issues are holding you back from avoiding these TLDs, I have my own experience to share to the contrary. Google will not punish your site if you have a .ch or .eu extension.

https://torrentfreak.com/how-to-stop-domain-names-being-seized-by-the-us-government-110205/

The domain suffix .tv, which is attached to the Pacific Island State of Tuvalu, is in fact owned by the aforementioned VeriSign, an American company, which does not quite fit the claims made by the owners of “openjustice”. In fact the short article (url above) is worth reading in full.

There are a number of other strange anomalies to be found with the site, if one cares to look.

The sites Facts & Questions page is interesting in itself, for a number of reasons:

FAQ

WHO ARE YOU?

Nobody you know. And that is going to remain that way

CAN I DONATE?

No. Open Justice is fully funded

CAN I PHONE?

No

CAN I EMAIL?

No*

SKYPE?

No

HOW DO I CONTACT YOU?

Use the Contact page

WHAT HAPPENS THEN?

Open Justice will evaluate what you sent

*WILL YOU CONTACT ME THEN?

Only if there is a public benefit and if you left an email address

BUT I HAVE FILES I NEED TO SEND YOU

If you are contacted it will explain how you can get material to Open Justice anonymously

CAN I COURIER OR MAIL YOU?

No. Material must be ready to be published online. That is the point

WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH IT ALL?

Open Justice evaluates the information and if there is a consensus the material is of public interest part or all may be published

WILL YOU TAKE THINGS DOWN WHEN I ASK?

Unlikely

BUT IT IS RUINING MY LIFE!

If it is true, it is true

THINK OF MY FAMILY/FRIENDS/FUTURE!

Open Justice balances this before deciding to publish and it regrets if others are negatively impacted by the truth.

I’M GOING TO….

By all means try. Open Justice has been created with the possibility of someone going to extremes. If you succeed Open Justice will return stronger for it

WHY DOES IT TAKE SO LONG TO GET A RESPONSE?

Various reasons. Fact checking. Background checking. Time differences. Other commitments

I AM FROM THE MEDIA

No interviews. You can help by doing your job properly. If you have something your employer can not or will not handle then you too can use Open Justice

HOW DO I….?

Your only method is to send us an email address and a brief overview as to what you need from Open Justice. If you get no response there is no interest. If you do get a response, it will clearly outline the next steps to take

DOES THAT MEAN YOU WILL KNOW WHO I AM?

Unless you tell us, or you slip up in some way, we will never know. Our protocols are designed to protect Open Justice, and if you stick to them too, you will be protected also

WHAT IF YOU DO DISCOVER WHO I AM?

Nothing happens. Open Justice does not care who you are. This service is about publishing information. This information stands on its own merits no matter who provides it

I HAVE BACKGROUND INFO

When you supply material you can tell Open Justice that it is for non-public use only

CAN I TRUST YOU?

Do not trust us. Start the process. Trust can only build over time and through both parties acting in a way that doesn’t threaten the anonymity of the other

COMMON SENSE

Open Justice will never ask who you are or for information that will expose who you are

HOW DO I KNOW I’M TALKING WITH OPEN JUSTICE

There is a protocol that will give you that confidence. It is explained when you are contacted

ANY ADVICE?

Do not tell anyone you use this service. The only secret is a secret where only you know it. Share it and the risk of being found out is close to 100 percent

I AM JUST READING THIS SITE SO HOW DO I KNOW IT IS ALL TRUE?

Open Justice attempts to provide a “confidence” rating to published content. If you believe what you read on this site that is your personal decision. The aim is to make information public. The rest is up to you

YOU SHOULD REALLY INVESTIGATE….

Open Justice does not investigate. It publishes information that is hidden from public view. The hard work is up to others. This site simply provides a method to get information to the public with the highest degree of anonymity and safety

.TV? WHY?

Using a .nz service, any New Zealand service, would place Open Justice within the reaches of Crown Law as well as risk being exposed to legal take-down orders. .tv names are robust to International take-down requests

HOW QUICKLY WILL IT BE PUBLISHED?

That depends on the quality and veracity of the material. Never immediately. It needs to be reviewed to see if it meets the public interest test

WILL IT BE PUBLISHED?

If the material is of poor quality, is historical with no further public implications, or is not in the public interest Open Justice will not publish it

Absolutely no mention of emailing anyone to advise that their documents have been uploaded. In fact the FAQ page says quite the opposite, that the site will not be contacting anyone, all very strange.

The sites “About” page is also enlightening:

This is a “whistleblowing” service

The emphasis is on security and anonymity for everyone involved

Open Justice will assist you in sending information without your identity ever being exposed.

Information released to this site must meet the public interest test as understood by a reasonable, educated and informed adult

This is not a service to get back at your ex

Open Justice will expose criminals, corruption, fraud and gross breaches of public trust

The aim is to provide the public with the raw data alongside any guiding information

Open Justice is pro-police, pro-law and order, and pro-authority. It may appear counter intuitive to provide a service that will occasionally frustrate these sectors. However, this is the nature of whistleblowing

This Service is extended to people in New Zealand only. But to ensure legal safety and separation it is 100% operated from elsewhere. No New Zealand currency pays for the operating costs. No New Zealanders are involved in operating it. None of the infrastructure is on NZ soil

Open Justice suspects there will be speculation as to who or what is behind all of this. You will be wrong as Open Justice people have no prior public profile (and hope to keep it that way)

The success of Open Justice is in the public’s hands. If there is no need for this site, it will wither

Like you, this site does not know where this will end up. If anywhere. It does not have a specific issue in mind

To launch, an email will be sent to selected media, bloggers, known activists, politicians and advocates that may have an interest in this service

Open Justice is ready

Author OJ

Posted on March 3, 2016

Post navigation

So far so good, but there are a few problems, absolutely no one we here at LF spoke with have ever been contacted, as claimed by the site owners, to advertise the sites existence. We ourselves certainly have not been contacted as yet?

Then there is the fact that the site appears to have gone live only a matter of days ago, at least that’s the impression given if one is to take the above date of March 3^rd, 2016 as an indication.

If one looks a little deeper however you get a date of February 16^th, 2016.

Observant readers will also have noted that the email account that was allegedly sent to Blomfield with the advice has a .ru suffix, different to the websites .tv suffix.

So are the website and its contents kosher? The truth is we just don’t know, nor are we at all keen on entering the site or downloading any content from it in order to find out.

There are of course many other reasons that a site like this may exist, legitimately or not.

It could well have been created by Blomfield himself, or even Ben Rachinger, just another of this pairs very clever scams, but we’ll come to that a little later.

Despite not having been anywhere near the site ourselves we do know that the website contains documents that neither team LF or our sources have ever seen before; emails dated much later than the emails supplied to us in 2012; some in fact relating to Blomfield’s defamation case against Cameron Slater.

So then who is responsible for the website, and assuming that it is kosher, who has uploaded the now notorious “Blomfield Files”, complete with substantial additions?

Again we don’t know and we have no way of telling at this stage.

Had we intended to upload the files in wholesale fashion we would have done so here on LF, but without a narrative or explanation that would have been a somewhat pointless exercise.

Having obviously excluded ourselves, and our sources, we are left with only two possibilities. The first being that another disgruntle Blomfield creditor, unknown to LF, who has had, or been given, access to a more extensive tranche of documents to that which were handed to LF and its sources back in 2012.

The second possibility is far more interesting, and frankly, just as likely.

Back in 2012 Blomfield made complaints with police against Slater and his sources. Among those complaints was the allegation that the files had been stolen and that they had been unlawfully uploaded.

The police investigated Blomfield’s complaints and ascertained that the information had only ever been uploaded so as to benefit fellow policing agency, New Zealand’s Serious Fraud Office.

The complaint fell at that hurdle, police concluding that no criminal offense had been made out. Additionally police concluded that the “hard-drive”, which Blomfield had alleged was stolen, had in fact not been, rather being left by Blomfield with one of his past business associates, a relationship that had apparently soured badly.

So having regard to the above what better way to manufacture a false allegation than creating an untouchable website, then falsely allege that the files in question had again been dealt with improperly by someone uploading them to another website.

In fact this possibility has a certain ring to it. Mind you, it would need someone with an IT skill set, someone other than Matthew Blomfield. They however are a dime a dozen these days, what with Bangalore, and then there is Ben Rachinger, we here he is currently in the job market.

So who dunnit? Again we don’t know for sure. What we do know however is this;

1. A website exists
2. the website claims to be a site for whistleblowers; to archive documents that are in the public interest
3. That website has the strange suffix .tv
4. The website currently has very little on it, more being added by the hour
5. The website is so far not searchable, using search engines
6. The website has given misleading or misguided information in its FAQ and ABOUT page’s, in particular the explanation for the choice of url suffix and that no one would be contacted.
7. That Matthew Blomfield alleges he received an email from this same website’s administrator, or someone connected, but from an address with an .ru suffix, only a matter of hours after the new website had commenced uploading business documents that they purport had once belonged to him.

From what we do know there are many more questions that flow, no doubt readers have a few of their own (we have opened comments on this post for that purpose).

If readers have any additional information whatsoever on this website please get in touch via the comments section below or any of the methods available in top right hand corner of this page.

If you have evidence that the new website is kosher, is safe to use, that it has been set up with a genuine agenda, and is indeed fit for purpose, then likewise, please let us know.

There are two reasons for posting this information, the first is to put on notice that we are aware that the site could have been manufactured with a specific criminal purpose in mind.

The second, that if the site is 100% kosher then people should be informed, as in that case, it looks as if New Zealand has a brand new dedicated whistle-blowing website, joining the growing number, that have positioned themselves at a safe distance, out of jurisdiction, and the reach of New Zealand’s more corrupt element.

If Matthew Blomfield didn’t have anything to do with the sites creation, well better luck next time Mr Blomfield, it would seem you have another adversary out there somewhere, another individual hell-bent on getting justice.

LF will continue to keep an eye on this new website, which appears currently to be uploading more documents,  and advise readers of further developments as they occur and we are able to understand them.

Up date (March 9, 2016):

What also interests us here at LF, now the Pete George article has been brought to our attention (see comments below), is the date that “Mr George’s” article was published, February 27th, 2016, five days in fact before the website had even been completed.

This of course means that whoever is behind the website wanted to let New Zealand’s most insignificant blogger know of a pending websites existence, above all other media organisations…oh and New Zealand Prime Minister John Key.

Our bet is that absolutely no other blogger or media outlet was advised of this sites existence via email, and that, more especially given Pete George’s close relationship with Blomfield, is indicative of the site being a vehicle with which Blomfield and his cohort had intended making more false allegations and complaints to New Zealand’s police.

LF also suspects the involvement of Daniel Toresen and his company, the investigators, aka Thompson & Toresen, who just happened to also be implicated with Blomfield in the theft of $100k; which the New Zealand Police have been investigating.

Toreson and Co also like playing off-shore, the “international” market, using false websites and PO boxes located in Navada:

The company director hired private investigation firm Thompson & Toresen to research the proposed deal. The investigators warned him that their inquiries confirmed the deal was a scam and to cease all contact immediately.

Despite the warning, the businessman thought the risk was worthwhile and decided to travel to the Netherlands. However, he was persuaded to take Mike Gillam, a senior Thompson & Toresen investigator, as security.

Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11202526

In addition to Toresen’s involvement with Blomfield in the theft of the $100K cheque, Toresen also has an axe to grind with Cameron Slater personally:

The Murphy Saga, Ctd

by Stephen Cook on October 2, 2015 at 8:00am

More details have emerged today about the November 2013 assault on Gordon ‘Ash’ Palmer by ex-police officer turned private investigator Daniel Thompson – the father of Daniel Toresen, the man involved in a supermarket car park stoush with Greenlane car dealer John Murphy.

Source: http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2015/10/the-murphy-saga-ctd-3/

This scam gets more transparent by the minute. If Pete George has not been knowingly involved from the outset then he has been taken for a very long ride.

Note: Investigations are now underway to ascertain if Matthew Blomfield or any of his associates have made false complaints with New Zealand police